The study of human remains is an archaeological study. Through this study one is informed about the origin of man as well as the past societies. Many human skeletons of the ancient time have been identified. Some of the human remains with much controversial debates include the Guadeloupe skeletons which are currently preserved in the national museum of Britain. One of the major dilemmas in museums of today is the handling of human remains which are often referred to as sacred. There is ongoing illicit trade on the same as most of the time archaeological objects are found displayed in exhibitions. One of the ongoing dilemmas about desecration of ancient human remains is the reburial controversy. Different cultures handle their dead differently. For example the graves of the European people are considered sacred whereas those of their Indian counterparts are not sacred. But one of the trends in Europe has been the moving of bones at people own convince (Mitchell, Lippert and Brunson-Hadley 22).
The sacred aspect of human remains
The sacredness of the European graves is time bound since this trend can only be maintained as long as the immediate relatives of the deceased are still alive. The only graves that are usually not tempered with are those of the rich families. For this reason the economic factor or status plays a major role in this whole issue. Other graves which are not likely to be disturbed are those with engraved curse upon them. For example the tomb of William Shakespeare which contain a curse. Most people view grave sanctity as a family issue if not a major concern to the cemetery. Therefore if this issue becomes a community matter then that will be classified under secondary issues. Some people advocate that a grave can only be dug out if there are no descendants to the deceased or when the original community line can no longer be traced. Another key challenge facing archeologists and museum is the conservation of the cultural heritage. One of the issues at hand is frequent looting in the museums therefore making it difficult to determine whether the goods in exhibitions were legally acquired or were looted from the museum (Zimmerman, Vitelli and Hollowell-Zimmer 177).